hurricane a week ago. >> thank you. >> that's going to do it for this hour. thanks so much for joining us. i'll be back with another hour of news at 11:00 p.m. eastern. stay tuned. consider this starts right now.

>> before 9/11, we couldn't ever imagined that guys with box cutters could kill 3,000 americans. you also say that we failed to see that this group that had been controlling parts of syria was going to be overrun iraq in such a short period. >> we were working on the assumption that basically this group originally called al-qaeda in mesopotamia was totally defeated. that was what the surge had done in 2007, 2008. >> we killaal does killal czar .

>> it's only been a few months since president obama was calling them the, jr. versus city. we didn't imagine not on the basis of any intelligence we had was that this group could move down and take over the second biggest city in iraq and basically take it without firing a shot. >> we spent billions if not trillions fighting terrorists since 9/11. how can we not at this point do better? >> there are a bunch of different reasons. we tend to either dismiss these people at complete crazy, or we think that they are thinking just like us and operate like us. that may be a bigger problem, because these are, they are a little bit like start ups up against some big corporation, east man kodak, for instance, they're very quick to move, reorient themselves, is specially isis, very quick to see where opportunities lie.

they don't have a lot of infrastructure they need to protect until recently. department of homeland security, 240,000 employees, 42 agencies. >> and one pun congressional committees we just talked to. >> all that makes for a big ossified bureaucracy slow to move. they cannot cope with these very fast moving, very imaginative terrorist groups. >> you mentioned the, jr. varsity comment. back in january, president obama said that. it had now come down through iraq to the heart of iraq and taken fallujah. at what appointment is a problem of imagination or does this become denial. >> there are none to blind as

those who will not see. there was a question of what do you do about it, what can you do about it. they knew the government was a disaster but didn't know what to do about it. obama didn't want to say this is the biggest terror front and not be able to do anything about it. one of the things disingenuous is all this talk about what should have been done six months ago. do you think the american people were ready to bomb syria six months ago? i don't think so. a year ago, that clearly was not the case. >> after all those words about this being the biggest threat, you write the flip side is mr. there is excessive alarmism. you quote former general john allen, the head of forces in having a saying that this could

be world war three. you also talk about terrorism expert who says this is shock and at-bat in reverse. do you think we're being alarmist about these guys? >> we are not being alarmists if we think there's a real possibility they will sometime in the relatively near future try to carry out terrorist acts in europe and in the united states. we're not alarmists if we look at those terror attacks and say we don't have to have 9/11 to be huge shock waves. >> something you address in the daily beast, the issue of the legality of the action. what do you think? >> if you go back and read the september, 2001 authorization of the use of military force. >> specifically about al-qaeda. >> it doesn't mention al-qaeda. it's even more specific than that. it talks about people involved with the acts of 9/11. it's pretty hard to make the case that that authorization extends to isis.

>> do you think congress is going to vote on this? will politics start getting in the way? >> politics is already getting in the way, but i think president obama would be wise to go to congress, because at this very moment, maybe not tomorrow or next week, if he moves right now, i think he can get that prom congress. >> he's got the momentum. a pleasure to have you with us. thank you. >> we'll be right back. >> ocd... taking over this woman's life... >> i don't wanna touch anything... >> now a controversial surgery can literally reprogram her mind >> we can modify emotional circuitry >> is this a miracle cure? or an ethical nightmare? >> there's a lot of mystery right now... >> rewiring the brain an america tonight investigative report only on al jazeera america @j

>> turning to president obama's high stakes speech in which he finally detailed his strategy to what he called degreat and ultimately destroy the islamic state group. >> i want the american people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in iraq and afghanistan. they will not involve american combat troops fighting on foreign soil. this counter terrorism campaign will be waged through a steady,

relentless effort to take out isil wherever they exist using air power and hour support for partners on the ground. >> while never uttering the word, he is calling the nation to war expanding an intense air campaign in iraq to syria in a conflict the administration has been loathe to get entangled in. >> i will not hesitate to take action against isil in syria, as well as iraq. the core principle of my presidency, if you threaten america, you will find no safe haven. >> the president made the case that left unchecked the terrorists are a threat to the united states. >> while we have not yet detected specific plotting against our homeland, isil leaders have threatened america and our allies. we believe thousands are fortunes, including europeans and americans ever joined them in syria and iraq, trained and battle hardened, they could try

to return to their home countries and carry out deadly attacks. >> shortly after the speech, i spoke to george mitchell who served as president obama's essential envoy for middle east peace and he recently wrote a three part series on middle east peace that ran in the boston globe. >> a pleasure to see you. thank you for joining us on this night. this was a critical speech for the president after weeks of criticism for saying he didn't have a strategy for combating the islamic state terrorists. he wanted to drive home this was not iraq and afghanistan. he called it a counter terrorism effort, didn't call it a war. >> that's right, he did make that distinction. i think it's an appropriate one. i think that we have to be careful not to assume that

american military power alone can deal with isis or the many other issues in the region. i think a critical element, which the president referred to is a government in iraq and is not seen as sectarian as the previous iraqi government has been seen. it's not a coincidence that where isis has succeeded is in areas that are sunni dominated and where the population has been disaffected with their government, which they see as a sectarian shia government not giving sunnis a fair shake. that has to be national government there in iraq hopefully and hopefully soon. >> an important political component within iraq. normally presidents use these prime time speeches to make a case to the american people. here, polls have shown that the

american people were already there, maybe ahead of the president supporting action against the terrorists. as you know, americans don't want troops to fight another war. the president stressed there would be no boots on the ground, but is it a good idea to limit however we'll go from the on set? >> in this case, it's necessary and appropriate, americans are rightly concerned. we spent a dozen years in both iraq and afghanistan with tremendous loss of life and great deal of resources in financial terms going into those efforts. in addition, i think the american people understand, and i think they will understand more in the years ahead that this is a long process in that region. it's a degree of turbulence that will continue for sometime. there are many overlapping conflicts within islam, sunni versus shia, sunni governments

against extremist groups like isis, persians versus arabs and the historical conflict between the arabs and israelis. it's going to be turbulent. you have to understand that isis is an out growth of al-qaeda, which is an out growth of the muslim brother and mujahadeen. >> we will be relying on coalition troops may not be up to it. when he's talking about training syrian forces to combat the forces in syria, won't that mean putting american troops on the ground? >> there will be some american forces as the president pointed out, special forces and some to conduct training, but i don't think this is going to lead to a

large-scale introduction of american combat forces to the degree that existed in both iraq and afghanistan. i think there's good reason for that. we haven't the outcome that we wanted in either place, and thereof to be others participating, and in particular, as the president noted, the muslim people themselves, particularly the sunni dominated man arckies in the gulf region have a step up and make clear their views in opposition to these extremist groups and make clear that they are prepared to undertake the effort to join in the effort with us and others, and there will be ground forces, iraqi forces, which have not performed well so far, kurdish forces, and there will be others in the region on which we can rely for intelligence, resources, assistance, logistics and so fort. the united states is the

dominant power in the world, but great as is our power, we cannot control events everywhere in the world and not every problem in the word is an exclusively american problem. we have a unique opportunity and power to influence events. that's what we're going to do here. i believe that we will succeed in degrading and defeating isis, the challenge is the more difficult one, the longer term one of helping to build responsible, reliable and what we hope tolerant and democratic states in the region. >> we'll need some unity of purpose to be able to do that. you were the top man in the senate for five years. the penalty says he has the authority to act on his own, and askedding congress for full opportunities and support. should there be a full debate about this in congress? wouldn't it have been better for the president to have gotten full blown authorization from

congress before moving forward? >> the united states is stronger both externally and internally when there is union anymore tee. that doesn't occur much anymore. there is as broader con sense for this in the country and congress and i think there will be expressions of support in congress in a variety of ways, most notably funding for the operation which has to be approved by congress. >> do you think the president can be the leader necessary to unit the country and also create that coalition that we need especially if we are not going to have troops on the ground to combat these people? the president has been described as very reluctant warrior. >> i'll tell you something, i prefer a president who is a reluctant warrior than one who's seeking combat. i think the president has been restrained and wise interns of

the use of american military power. if we engage in military combat everywhere we're asked to go, we will soon be unable to engage in that combat anywhere. there is a limit to our resources to our strength, and keep in mind that the greatest strength that the united states has in the world is our ideals. the principles under which our country was created and which have led us to the point today. military power and economic strength are important, but it is ideals that are the primary basis of influencing the world, and that means that we do believe in restraint, we don't seek out war, we are not aggressors in conflicts. i think that's consistent with the american tradition, not contrary to it. >> thank you very much for your in sight. >> thank you. >> we'll be back with more of "consider this."

real reporting from around the world. this is what we do. al jazeera america.

>> the recent fighting in gaza killed palestinians and israelis. israel and hamas are currently abiding by a ceasefire, but uneasy alliances on both sides constantly threaten the temporary peace. at age 17, the son of a founder of hamas was on his way to a life of extremism. after arrested by israelis, he

became a spy for the internal israeli security agency. he provided high level information on hamas for more than a decade. his story was the subject of his book, son of hamas. "the green prince" is a story of a most unusual alliance. >> we called him the green prince. >> my father was the top ma'am has leader in the west bank. >> he had no clue what i was doing. >> it's like recording the son of the israeli prime minister. >> deep in my heart, i was really terrified. >> a good source needs to be with you, not against. >> you can get killed anytime. >> i really felt responsible for him as a source and a human being. >> i was on my own. >> he was really tough. >> i realized that people are dying because of this lie. >> we're joined by the man who turned against hamas, and by his

handler from the israeli intelligence agency. the film is now playing in select cities and will continue to open in more cities over the coming weeks. it's very good to have you both with us. >> thank you. >> quite a story you both have. yours is particularly amazing. you're the son of the top hamas leader in the west bank. you're already under surveillance by the israelis once you became a teenager and the israelis at one point arrest you, put you in a jail and talk to you about trying to come over to their side and help them out. what was your reaction and when did you finally say i do have to work for them? >> when i witnessed the brutality of hamas movement in prison, i raised the question about the very nature of the movement. >> because you were in an israeli prison but there was a section controlled by hamas. >> yes, inside the israeli prisons, hamas control their own

prisoners and other rival palestinian factions control their own members, so hamas basically was investigating their own members who give information to israel, and they tortured and killed suspects of collaborating with israel. now i ask myself, is the nature of the movement that my father is risking his life to found, and we, as a family, suffered a lot for the sake of that organization. this is where i start questioning the very nature of hamas, which led eventually to me not working for israel, working with israel to stop hamas madness. >> you say in the movie that this is the worst thing you possibly could have done, that this is worse than raping your mother for a hamas member. >> it's a very shameful thing and that culture is based on shame and honor.

it's not like here, everybody's based on wrong and right. basically, i knew that it was a very shameful thing, but in the meantime, it was the right thing in my opinion, to save a human life. how could you go wrong by saving a human life? that was my compass. that was my conscience. >> how did you feel when you talked to him for the first time, because you were his handler from day one. did you see that kind of moral compass he had? >> yes, i saw the moral compass, although i think it was a process that evolved over the years, and we learned each other. he saw how the agency is treating him and others, and we saw how he treats and what kind of information he brings. he was not the only one walking

and having this kind of knowing compass, knowing that he actually stopped killings. >> he may have been the most important spy you had inside hamas. >> yes, he was the most important and i think understanding he gave israel about hamas at that time was something we couldn't even imagine. >> could have saved the life of perez at one point. >> you went to incredible lengths to make sure he was not discovered, but it's difficult to believe that you did so for 10 years. you went as far as bombing his house. >> yes, people tend to think in the west bank that israel is using people, but actually, we do a lot, and we put lots of effort in keeping the safety of the people that work with us. you were mentioning, the event, we tried to arrest the green prince, the israeli army did not know that he was working with us.

they knew that they were going to arrest a big terrorist, so trying to get him, and making sure that he's not at home, they tarted his house. at the same time, he was actually hiding in different place and in that way, we kept him with a way to keep his cover. >> when i said that this was an unusual alliance, that was no understatement, your father a founder of hamas, your dad a general in the israeli army. >> right. >> at what point did you make that connection? >> not immediately. i, you know, just later on, when we started to evaluate and understand what happened, we start to think about all the circumstances that brought us together, because even fours, it's amazing, you know, i came from this background. my father was actually in charge of the west bang, doing the

first palestinian inty fad da. the guy who founded hamas is his father, but our friendship evolved without thinking about those circumstances. >> i want to get to the most important part of the friendship in a minute, but do want to ask you, you talked about the shame of collaborating with israel. you i'm sure saw the pictures of hamas operatives killing people in the streets of gaza after the recent fighting. did you think that could be me? >> i felt sorry for the people killed. back in 1996, during my imprisonment, this was what hamas was doing to people, to intimidate everybody. i think that they still use the same strategy, to intimidate an

entire society that anyone who goes against the will of the movement will be executed. the execution took place outside the mosque in a public, children witnessed that, women witnessed that, and again, this is their strategy, does not scare me and it should not scare anybody who lives in freedom. >> your bravery is incredible. you've been disowned by your dad and certainly must live under some level of threat. he finally comes to the united states, and because of his connections to hamas, they don't want to give him asylum. at this point, you decide i don't care, i'm coming to the united states and i'm speaking out in his favor. >> we don't leave a soldier behind. he was a soldier for humidity h. i couldn't let him meet his destiny without helping him. in some way, i didn't have a

choice. i needed to do it. it was something that my heart told me to do, and this is why i came to the united states to testify for him. >> i know you guys have called each other brothers. it's really a pleasure to see you. one can only hope that more palestinian and israelis can call each other brothers in the future. >> hopefully. >> the green prince is now open in select cities and will open in more cities in the coming weeks. "consider this" will be right back.

>> a new book looks at struggles in the last year of his life, death of a king, the real story of dr. martin luther king's, jr. final year show how his voluntary opposition of the vietnam war led to blocks of support being lost. i sat down with the book's author tavis smiley, here's and

ex10ed preview. >> this book has not been written before because it focuses on the last year of his life, april 4, 1967 to april 4, 1968. he's here in new york to give the speech beyond vietnam, comes out against the war in manhattan and refers to america as the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today. that's a strong indictment from a black man to a white nation. >> created quite the backlash. >> ooh, lord god, did it. the next day, everybody and everything started to turn against him. he gives the speech where he utters that phrase and talks about the triple threat of racism, poverty and military. >>. as long as this negro was staying in the lane of civil rights, he was ok and acceptable but when he started talking about foreign policy and started saying that budgets are moral

documents and the money you're wasting over there in vietnam should be spent at home, the bombs that are dropping there are landing in the get toes and barrios of american cities and war is the enemy of the poor, they turned on martin luther king that year. >> i'm old enough to remember the accusations of him being a communist. it wasn't just white america who turned against him, although you're right about how 75% of whites thought he was irrelevant at that point, a good majority of blacks thought the same thing. part was the rise of the black panther party and young people being attracted to those more militant. >> we so deified him in death. he and johnson worked and voting rights and civil rights, the two most important pieces of

legislation in the 20t 20th century, now hes against johnson on vietnam, so the white house turned on him. the number was almost 60% in black america thought he was persona non-grata. whitney young and urban league comes out publicly against dr. king. martin must have felt like the cosmos had turned on him. >> what would he say if now, 46 years later, if he saw a black president, if he saw that there has been great progress on race issues but there continues to be race issues and discrimination in this country. >> the closest thing to him seeing a black president in his lifetime was him seeing the first plaque mayor of a major american city, carl stokes in cleveland. he spent a lot of time campaigning for him to get

elected mayor. he certainly would have involved himself in the obama campaign. they might not have asked him, because his truth is so subversive, they might not have wanted him on the campaign trail, but he certainly would have campaigned for president obama about that once elected, he would have said to him i love you, but i'm going to be your critic and push you and hold you accountable to those things in the best interests of the american people. >> before the election, where barack obama first became president of the united states, you weren't uncritical of the president. you brought up issues, and you got a lot of grief for it. in fact, you ended up changing jobs to some extent because of the fact that you had been treated harshly because you weren't toeing the party line and you were bringing up questions. how do you feel about the president today and has he done his job especially when it comes to race. in 2011, you said that he has

failed american blacks. >> i think that the president has a difficult job, and i certainly am pulling and praying for him every day. not just to be another garden variety politician, but a statesman. he could be that and missed an opportunity to be a statesman in ferguson and chose to be another garden variety politician and didn't want to get involved. >> should he have gone? >> he should have gone. >> even though martin luther king didn't go to newark or new york. >> he wasn't the president. obama is. king is a prophet, obama is the president antpresident of this country, as far as i'm concerned, black, white, republican or democratic, if there's a major crisis in this country in a major american city or a city next to a major american city like ferguson is to st. louis is on fire and the city's been militarized and the city is burning, and people are rioting and protesting and being

killed, beaten and maced, the president ought to step into that situation. i'm not going to let president obama off the hook anymore than i let george bush off the hook for not going to new orleans. i'm skeptical of the democratic party for using this issue to whip up african-american voters in the country quarterback get them to turn out for the elections. >> that brings up an interesting question, which is is there a problem with the african-american community becoming so identified with the democratic party and voting to overwhelmingly democratic, because then aren't they seeing the democrats ignore them because they take them for granted and republicans saying we are not going to get their votes anyway. home e. i'm being a little harsh, but isn't that what's happening? >> you aren't being harsh at all. the hispanic community are being

ignored by one party and isn't that the same, black or brown. it's an issue we have to take seriously. what is crazy about this is the republicans are too stuck on stupid to take at advantage of that. here you have two constituencies, black and brown in many respects both feel marginalized by their party, but you can't give them another option that is in their best interest. you cannot stop contesting their humanity with the policies you are pushing forward. that's why you need people like dr. king, willing to tell the truth no matter where the chips fall. >> that would be a good place on which to end, but i'm not going to end there. >> shoot. >> make a bit of a harsh turn here. >> i feel something coming. >> ironically, you know, here at aljazeera america, we do serious news, we don't do tabloid or much entertainment.

i suspect i am going to be the first person on this network to ever utter the follow four words, dancing with the stars. >> you might be the last. [ laughter ] >> you know what, i never thought i would utter those words either. in part, because if you'd asked me this, you know, five, 10 years ago, the answer would have been no and i told them no this year three times. the third time, they said take a meeting with us. i took a meeting. after the meeting, i sat down at the kitchen table and did pros, consist and it turned out to my surprise and my horror that the reasons for doing the show outweighed the reason for not. i'm about to turn 50. i figured i would do one last stupid, foolish ridiculous thing before i turned 50 and this is it, this is definitely it. >> was one of those pros wearing a sparkly costume. >> i will not be doing that, i guarantee you. i said i get final approval of

what i wear. we're not going out like that, on you tube with a sparkly costume on. >> i will vote for you. >> my man. >> death of a king, the real story of dr. martin luther king, jr.'s final year is out in book stores now and you can catch my full interview a week from saturday. we'll be back with more of "consider this." only on al jazeera america @sts.

>> you might think the most exciting news about stonehenge in the 21st century was president obamaed visit to the ancient site last week, but a study led by the university of birmingham discovered hundreds of new features, 17 previously unknown monuments buried beneath

the four square miles surrounding stonehenge. these discoveries rewriting the book of what we thought we knew about the famous prehistoric monument. joining us now is brian fagen, author of several popular archaeology books, an emeritus professor at u.c. santa barbara. this was a big, high tech endeavor, researchers used all sorts of instruments, including ground penetrating radar, gravity and magnetic sensors to scan under the ground and discovered 17 new monuments, dozens of burial pits, even 100-foot long wooden building that is believed to have been used for a burial rituals. how is this so completely changing our understanding of stonehenge? >> archaeology has changed radically in the last 20 years. for a long, long time, people looked at stonehenge and

excavated there as a stone circle, or a series of circles. has research goes back to the 17th century. now with this new technology that looks under the ground, we're begin to go realize that stonehenge was part of an norm and you say sacred landscape, and this is the exciting thing. we're now looking at the country, at the sites around it and the =phepbt 20 years are going to be very, very exciting. >> people have been studying stonehenge for centuries, there are research projects as army as the 1620's. with all this digging around the area for so long, why had none of these features been found? >> very simply because we couldn't do it. we are now in an amacing period in archaeology where for example there's a burial of an archer

near stone hen where destroyeding his bones, we know he came from central europe. there was no way to do this 10 years ago. ten years ago, we certainly couldn't have looked under the ground like now. people did their best, but they are digging a monument, not looking at landscape. >> what does this tell us about the people who built the monument? the prevailing theory is stonehenge was visited by small groups, now appears to be this enormous gathering place? it's a landscape. you've got to think of stonehenge acknowledge landscape in the context of something like westminster abbey or temple of the god in egypt, places that were sacred for hundreds of years and changed and modified. the way you've got to think about this landscape is small numbers of farmers lived there and occasionally much larger numbers of people came to celebrate rituals and the

landscape changed over many, many centuries to accommodate changing beliefs. >> talking about rituals, the timber building that's quite large is believe to have been the site of bizarre burial rituals. how do we know that that is what was going on there? >> they are making an informed guess at this point. what they will now do, they located the timbers, they will now excavate it in the next few years, i would imagine. it looks very like other buildings elsewhere, large timber structures standing by themselves. what would happen is that you would die and the people believed you were going to become an ancestor. they would expose your body in the channel house, let the bones be exposed and the flesh decompose, then gather the bones and bury them in the sale in a way as a dead person, you returned to the sale and became

a revered ancestors, because ancestors were very big here. >> is there a chance we will get to see what's underground anytime soon? >> that is a very difficult question. what they have done, and it's amazing how fast they've done it, they've exposed in electronic terms, a landscape, but to dig one of these sites would take weeks or months and enormous sums of money, so what you're looking at here is a long-term exploration of this landscape, of the channel house, of burial grounds, of pits. this is going to cost a lot of money and take a lot of time. in 50 years, our understanding of stonehenge will be completely different and much more refined than it is today. this is truly one of the most exciting archeological discoveries in generations. >> it will be a fascinating exploration. thank you for guiding us through

these first steps of that exploration. pleasure to have you with us. the conversation continues on our website or on our facebook or google plus pages. you can also find us on twitter. we'll see you next time. >> the first stop for many child migrants to the united states is this border patrol facility in mcallen, texas. >> "good afternoon, welcome to the rio grande valley processing center..." >> it opened this summer in response to an influx of unaccompanied minors from mexico and central america. >> do you think this is an immigration issue or a refugee issue? do you think some of them will be granted political asylum? >> we're not talking about criminals. these are innocent children, fleeing desperate